CC: Would this bother you from a pastor?

[mazakaal]

I visited a church recently and was pretty surprised during the sermon. This was the regular pastor, not a lay-man who was filling in. He was giving a sermon on the twelve spies going into the promised land; ten could only see the difficulties, but two trusted in the power of God to help the Israelites conquer the land. So the main jist of the message was good. But he kept making references to how crazy it was that these ten men still didn't trust God after wandering in the wilderness for forty years and seeing the miracles that God had done in that time. It wasn't one reference; it was mentioned repeatedly, that this was all happening after forty years.

 

I wanted to shout out, "Hello! The forty years of wandering was AFTER the disbelief of the Israelites, as a result of it!!!!!!" I didn't, of course. I kept my mouth shut, was polite chatting afterwards, bit my tongue when introduced to the pastor, and left as quickly as I could. But it still kind of freaks me out that this pastor (not a young guy - at least in his 50's, though I don't know how long he's been pastoring) had such a basic misunderstanding of Bible chronology.

 

So, would this bug you?

[Melissa in Australia]

yes!

I heard a church leader give a sermon and during the sermon he kept taking about a earthquake that had just happened in the middle east ( Iran I think) and how the houses had fallen down because they didn't follow the building codes. I felt like shouting that the houses had lasted 2000 years!

I don't even remember what the sermon was about, or how the building code tied into his sermon.

[Mercy_Me]

Atheist here, so take this for what it is worth: Yes! I understand no one is perfect, and it is up to the person to follow through and dig deeper, BUT....if I am spending my precious time, the info the person is giving had better match with whatever it is that he/she is teaching from. Otherwise, I'll stop trusting ALL of the information.

[FlockOfSillies]

But God performed miracles even during the time in the wilderness. The manna and water He provided each day for 2 million people, Korah's rebellion, Aaron's rod budding, the water coming from the rock, the bronze serpent, the fact that their shoes didn't wear out, His very presence in the pillar of flame and the pillar of cloud.

 

I don't think that pastor was as uninformed about the Exodus as you think. It's entirely possible that he covered those miracles in previous sermons. You could have politely asked him your question, and if he was worth his salt, he would have been able to quote you chapter and verse, and to do so graciously. It wouldn't have been the first time someone questioned his accuracy, I can assure you.

 

Since that opportunity has gone by, perhaps it would be better for you to search the Scriptures (particularly the book of Numbers) to see for yourself whether what he was saying is true, rather than assuming that you are right and he is wrong.

 

I think you owe that church and that pastor a second chance.

[mazakaal]

Absolutely there were plenty of miracles during the Exodus. I'm not denying that. But the pastor continued to refer to '40 years' and how crazy it was that after '40 years' the people still didn't believe.

[Rhonda in TX]

Absolutely there were plenty of miracles during the Exodus. I'm not denying that. But the pastor continued to refer to '40 years' and how crazy it was that after '40 years' the people still didn't believe.

 

Yes, especially when you consider that after the 40 years they DID believe!

 

And yes, this would bother me.

[mytwomonkeys]

from my perspective, the israelites did lack faith at times throughout the 40 years, and they whined sometimes. when i read about their time in the wilderness, i don't think it's crazy though, but rather, i've always found it comforting. they were human, just like us, and often reacted in the same manner i probably would have. i've got to go to church, but i'm glad to share passage that i think the pastor could have been referencing, and there are several. or you could just email him. i think it's unfair to say how misinformed he was.

 

 

ETA - also in hebrews 3:7-9 in talks about the israelites lack of faith in the wilderness....so you can look at that too.

Edited November 7, 2010 by mytwomonkeys

[Heatherwith4]

Yes, it would!

[mytwomonkeys]

but, it's biblical. how is upsetting to some of you???

 

read hebrews 3: 7-9

[katemary63]

Yeah, I'm lost. In the wilderness, God was there DAILY and OBVIOUSLY! After FOURTY YEARS of the presence of a daily and obvious God you still don't have the faith to do what He says, that's pretty amazing. I don't get it.

[Mom0012]

Yes, whenever I've read this book in the Bible, I've always thought, oh no, not again! How can they still doubt? And the example you just gave of the 10 men doubting is exactly one of those times I would feel that way.

 

I feel like I am not understanding something in your post. Did this incident with the spies take place at an earlier time? Had it not been 40 years yet?

 

Lisa

[mazakaal]

from my perspective, the israelites did lack faith at times throughout the 40 years, and they whined sometimes. when i read about their time in the wilderness, i don't think it's crazy though, but rather, i've always found it comforting. they were human, just like us, and often reacted in the same manner i probably would have. i've got to go to church, but i'm glad to share passage that i think the pastor could have been referencing, and there are several. or you could just email him. i think it's unfair to say how misinformed he was.

 

 

ETA - also in hebrews 3:7-9 in talks about the israelites lack of faith in the wilderness....so you can look at that too.

 

 

I'm not upset that some of the Israelites lacked faith. I'd like to be like Joshua and Caleb but readily admit that too frequently I do lack faith, like the Israelites. The thing I have a problem with is the chronology. According to the Bible, the Israelites were in slavery in Egypt. Then Moses led them out of slavery and to the promised land. He sent 12 spies to check out the land. Ten gave a bad report because there were 'giants' in the land, but two gave a good report of how good the land was. The Israelites sided with the ten and as a result, God caused them to wander in the wilderness for 40 years until the unbelieving generation died out. Then they crossed the Jordan with Joshua in the lead and conquered Jericho. The pastor was making the point that the 10 spies didn't have faith even after they had wandered in the wilderness for 40 years. The reality is that the 40 years of wandering was a result of their unbelief. So his reasoning was flawed. He switched the order of the two events. Sometimes chronology doesn't matter. Did Abraham live first or Job? It doesn't really matter. But thinking, and more importantly preaching, that a cause of something was actually a result did bother me, especially as this was coming from a pastor who, imho, should know better.

[mazakaal]

Yes, whenever I've read this book in the Bible, I've always thought, oh no, not again! How can they still doubt? And the example you just gave of the 10 men doubting is exactly one of those times I would feel that way.

 

I feel like I am not understanding something in your post. Did this incident with the spies take place at an earlier time? Had it not been 40 years yet?

 

Lisa

 

Yes, exactly. The 12 spies occurred before the 40 years, not after it, and actually was the cause of the 40 years of wandering. There was another incident when 2 spies were sent into Jericho after the 40 years, but there was no disbelief issue with that incident. And he was clearly referencing the 12 spies, not the 2.

[freetobeme]

i think the OP's point is that the forty years came AFTER the spies were sent out and reported back. it does seem to be an error in chronology and it would bother me.

 

(posting at the same time!)

[NCJessieRN]

Maybe I'm misreading your post but during the 40years in the wilderness the Lord performed many signs and wonders so you would think after 40 years all 12 spies would have no doubt about the Lord's faithfulness but no. Even after 40 years of miracle after miracle only 2 believed.

 

 

Acts 7:36 He brought them out, after that he had showed wonders and signs in the land of Egypt, and in the Red sea, and in the wilderness forty years.

[NCJessieRN]

Oh I guess I am misreading something here.

[NCJessieRN]

I'm not upset that some of the Israelites lacked faith. I'd like to be like Joshua and Caleb but readily admit that too frequently I do lack faith, like the Israelites. The thing I have a problem with is the chronology. According to the Bible, the Israelites were in slavery in Egypt. Then Moses led them out of slavery and to the promised land. He sent 12 spies to check out the land. Ten gave a bad report because there were 'giants' in the land, but two gave a good report of how good the land was. The Israelites sided with the ten and as a result, God caused them to wander in the wilderness for 40 years until the unbelieving generation died out. Then they crossed the Jordan with Joshua in the lead and conquered Jericho. The pastor was making the point that the 10 spies didn't have faith even after they had wandered in the wilderness for 40 years. The reality is that the 40 years of wandering was a result of their unbelief. So his reasoning was flawed. He switched the order of the two events. Sometimes chronology doesn't matter. Did Abraham live first or Job? It doesn't really matter. But thinking, and more importantly preaching, that a cause of something was actually a result did bother me, especially as this was coming from a pastor who, imho, should know better.

 

Gotcha...I had the wrong chronology too.:001_smile: That would bother me. If you are a pastor preparing a message you read the Word to prepare so he should have said the correct chronology. But I would have asked the pastor after it after the service so I could be clear he was on the wrong page.

[Chris in VA]

Yes, it would REALLY bug me. And I wouldn't be above mentioning it as I was shaking his hand--"Thank you for your sermon. I thought the 12 spies incident happened BEFORE the 40 years of wandering. Am I in error?"

 

It reminds me of a time my mom was in bible study with her interim minister. The minister said Jesus was illiterate. He did NOT mean "itinerant," as in a preacher without a home church. He meant "couldn't read or write." My mom gently asked, "Then how did he stand up and read the Scriptures in the synagogue?" Coulda heard a pin drop...

 

We all make mistakes, that's for sure, and the pastor in your incident made a huge one. At the very least, he should correct it next time he's in the pulpit. His main point is still valid, i.e., that the Israelites lacked faith after many proofs of God's miracles, but there's no excuse for what he said.

[Kathleen in VA]

Yes, it would REALLY bug me. And I wouldn't be above mentioning it as I was shaking his hand--"Thank you for your sermon. I thought the 12 spies incident happened BEFORE the 40 years of wandering. Am I in error?"

 

It reminds me of a time my mom was in bible study with her interim minister. The minister said Jesus was illiterate. He did NOT mean "itinerant," as in a preacher without a home church. He meant "couldn't read or write." My mom gently asked, "Then how did he stand up and read the Scriptures in the synagogue?" Coulda heard a pin drop...

 

We all make mistakes, that's for sure, and the pastor in your incident made a huge one. At the very least, he should correct it next time he's in the pulpit. His main point is still valid, i.e., that the Israelites lacked faith after many proofs of God's miracles, but there's no excuse for what he said.

 

:iagree:That's a pretty big mistake to make. You're absolutely right OP - the wandering was a result of the Israelites lack of faith when the 12 spies came back. My kids could tell you that. Wow. That's just kind of weird. Hard to imagine he doesn't know the Bible any better than that. There is a trust factor here. When I go to church I expect that the pastor has studied the Word of God in a concentrated way and is at least familiar with the historical events. Your experience would cast doubt on anything else he had to say.

[mazakaal]

When I go to church I expect that the pastor has studied the Word of God in a concentrated way and is at least familiar with the historical events. Your experience would cast doubt on anything else he had to say.

 

Yes. That's exactly how I felt.

[AuntieM]

Oh my. I would definitely have had to ask him about that afterwards (in a quiet way). I'd consider it doing him a favor. The Bible does charge teachers of the Word with great accountability for teaching it rightly.

 

Kind of nteresting that he referenced the unbelievingly generation after the forty years, since by then all but two of them were dead.

[katemary63]

Yes, exactly. The 12 spies occurred before the 40 years, not after it, and actually was the cause of the 40 years of wandering. There was another incident when 2 spies were sent into Jericho after the 40 years, but there was no disbelief issue with that incident. And he was clearly referencing the 12 spies, not the 2.

 

Ohhhh.. Got it. Yeah, that'd be weird.

[lionfamily1999]

It would have ruined the sermon for me. I would have probably kept my mouth shut too.

 

We had a great pastor for a time, and he was very well-read. There was one thing, though, that drove me nuts. He kept referring to gold as an impure substance. It's silly and doesn't have much to do with anything (except when he used it to illustrate symbolism in the NT). I couldn't bring myself to tell him, but now I think I may jot a quick note. It didn't occur to me that anyone else would get as irritated by this as myself.

 

Maybe you could do the same? Even if you don't plan on going back, relieving him of this misinformation could be a very good thing. If he meant that they (the spies) continued to not trust God to the end (even forty years of miracles AFTER they had their mission), then he needs to know that he isn't being clear.

 

Yeah, I'm lost. In the wilderness, God was there DAILY and OBVIOUSLY! After FOURTY YEARS of the presence of a daily and obvious God you still don't have the faith to do what He says, that's pretty amazing. I don't get it.

:lol: Our new pastor taught on Jonah one day. He talked about swimming in the river and how he would pray the second anything touched his leg :p Then, he talked about Jonah, facing the storm, eviction from the boat, the fish and how Jonah REFUSED to turn to God until DAYS of living in the fish. Jonah knew God already, he'd already been a faithful follower, but refused to turn to God through all of that. He lost faith.

 

It's amazing, but it happens.

[simka2]

A one time slip up wouldn't have bugged me, but the repition would have.

[mytwomonkeys]

I'm not upset that some of the Israelites lacked faith. I'd like to be like Joshua and Caleb but readily admit that too frequently I do lack faith, like the Israelites. The thing I have a problem with is the chronology. According to the Bible, the Israelites were in slavery in Egypt. Then Moses led them out of slavery and to the promised land. He sent 12 spies to check out the land. Ten gave a bad report because there were 'giants' in the land, but two gave a good report of how good the land was. The Israelites sided with the ten and as a result, God caused them to wander in the wilderness for 40 years until the unbelieving generation died out. Then they crossed the Jordan with Joshua in the lead and conquered Jericho. The pastor was making the point that the 10 spies didn't have faith even after they had wandered in the wilderness for 40 years. The reality is that the 40 years of wandering was a result of their unbelief. So his reasoning was flawed. He switched the order of the two events. Sometimes chronology doesn't matter. Did Abraham live first or Job? It doesn't really matter. But thinking, and more importantly preaching, that a cause of something was actually a result did bother me, especially as this was coming from a pastor who, imho, should know better.

 

okay. gotcha. i totally misunderstood your first post. i apologize :)

 

ETA. today my pastor was referencing noah & how it rained for 40 days and nights ...he insinuated that on the 40th day noah went out of the ark and worshiped god. it bothered me because they were on the ark for many months after it rained, waiting for dry land. it only rained for 40 days, but they lived on the ark for about a year. i know my pastor personally, so i'm confident his error wasn't on purpose. it still stood out though, lol.

Edited November 7, 2010 by mytwomonkeys

[lionfamily1999]

okay. gotcha. i totally misunderstood your first post. i apologize :)

 

ETA. today my pastor was referencing noah & how it rained for 40 days and nights ...he insinuated that on the 40th day noah went out of the ark and worshiped god. it bothered me because they were on the ark for many months after it rained, waiting for dry land. it only rained for 40 days, but they lived on the ark for about a year. i know my pastor personally, so i'm confident his error wasn't on purpose. it still stood out though, lol.

He may have meant that Noah went out on deck.

[mytwomonkeys]

He may have meant that Noah went out on deck.

 

yes, you're probably right. my pastor is incredibly awesome & a seminary graduate of harvard. it was just poor wording, i have no doubt:)

[lionfamily1999]

yes, you're probably right. my pastor is incredibly awesome & a seminary graduate of harvard. it was just poor wording, i have no doubt:)

That's where I start to get all muddled. Should you tell him that his phrasing was misunderstood?

 

I've been thinking about how much I keep my mouth shut and whether or not I should have said something a lot lately.

[Mimm]

It would bother me. I don't currently attend church but if I did, I would want to be able to respect my pastor's depth of knowledge of the Bible.

[abbeyej]

Yes. Absolutely.

[angela in ohio]

So, would this bug you?

 

No, I get wrong, dumb things stuck in my head from time to time, and then I repeat them until someone says something, and then I feel like the biggest dolt. If that was the only experience someone had with me, they might think I had no clue. It even used to happen to me when I was at work. Until I don't do it, I won't fault anyone else.

 

I bet someone said something to him, and I would go back to see if he makes a correction. And if I heard a few more things that were wrong, I might then doubt his Biblical knowledge.

[Hedgehog]

I visited a church recently and was pretty surprised during the sermon. This was the regular pastor, not a lay-man who was filling in. He was giving a sermon on the twelve spies going into the promised land; ten could only see the difficulties, but two trusted in the power of God to help the Israelites conquer the land. So the main jist of the message was good. But he kept making references to how crazy it was that these ten men still didn't trust God after wandering in the wilderness for forty years and seeing the miracles that God had done in that time. It wasn't one reference; it was mentioned repeatedly, that this was all happening after forty years.

 

I wanted to shout out, "Hello! The forty years of wandering was AFTER the disbelief of the Israelites, as a result of it!!!!!!" I didn't, of course. I kept my mouth shut, was polite chatting afterwards, bit my tongue when introduced to the pastor, and left as quickly as I could. But it still kind of freaks me out that this pastor (not a young guy - at least in his 50's, though I don't know how long he's been pastoring) had such a basic misunderstanding of Bible chronology.

 

So, would this bug you?

 

I understand you to mean that you are bothered about the chronological error. If it happened once in a Bible talk, then I'd probably just assume a slip-up, but since he mentioned it repeatedly, I'd be bothered for sure.

 

We attend a church where there is no pastor or paid ministry. Every willing brother takes turns to preach each week. In addition to the preacher, there are brothers who take turns leading the service - who also have the responsibility to correct the preacher if he says anything doctrinally wrong. To be honest, I've never seen this actually put into practice, neither have I heard any errors that seriously bothered me. If I did, I'd be questioning whether I should be attending.

Edited November 7, 2010 by Hedgehog

[6packofun]

I've heard teachers and pastors express this opinion and I really think that most of them are trying to explain how patient and long-suffering God is towards those He loves and that it's illogical ("crazy") for the Israelites not to have trusted God. He delivered them out of over 400 years in captivity, He is actually PRESENT with them in the cloud and tabernacle, He provides for their physical needs and it takes such a short time for them to turn from Him. Was it easy living? Hardly, but I think we're all a little nutty sometimes to not SEE Him in our everyday lives..and to think they had God right there with them, too! Hindsight is 20/20, of course. ;)

 

I'd cut the pastor a break on this one. Maybe not the best wording, but I understand the underlying point. (And see that point made about the "silly" disciples who doubted Christ when He was right there with them explaining things all the time! LOL)

[Chris in VA]

I've heard teachers and pastors express this opinion and I really think that most of them are trying to explain how patient and long-suffering God is towards those He loves and that it's illogical ("crazy") for the Israelites not to have trusted God. He delivered them out of over 400 years in captivity, He is actually PRESENT with them in the cloud and tabernacle, He provides for their physical needs and it takes such a short time for them to turn from Him. Was it easy living? Hardly, but I think we're all a little nutty sometimes to not SEE Him in our everyday lives..and to think they had God right there with them, too! Hindsight is 20/20, of course. ;)

 

I'd cut the pastor a break on this one. Maybe not the best wording, but I understand the underlying point. (And see that point made about the "silly" disciples who doubted Christ when He was right there with them explaining things all the time! LOL)

 

But it's not the opinion she's objecting to--it's the fact he got the biblical chronology wrong.

[TravelingChris]

We had a similar problem once. It was at a church we weren't attending but a pastor there gave a short message before the activities we were doing there. He got something wrong Biblically. My girls questioned me about how could a pastor get this wrong? (I don't remember what it was but it wasn't an opinion thing, it was a fact like chronology or who two characters in a certain story were). I explained that we always go to churches which have ministers who have studied Scripture (gone to seminary) and were examined by leaders but not all churches value the same things. Some value speaking gifts or something else above actual knowledge. I believe that ministers who are preachers should have the gift of preaching but also have to have the knowledge which comes from many, many hours of study.

 

It would have bothered me too. I am one who looks up things in the Bible as the sermon is preached or a Sunday school lesson is given. Sometimes it is the text quoted and sometimes I am chasing threads. Today, we were in Romans in my class and the teacher suddenly veered off into another area. That caused me to look up stuff on that other thread and my dh had to bring me back since I was already to argue the not very relevant thread the teacher had introduced and by this time abandoned.

[Mom0012]

Yes, exactly. The 12 spies occurred before the 40 years, not after it, and actually was the cause of the 40 years of wandering. There was another incident when 2 spies were sent into Jericho after the 40 years, but there was no disbelief issue with that incident. And he was clearly referencing the 12 spies, not the 2.

 

Thanks for clarifying! Now I understand.

 

Lisa

[Laurie4b]

No, I get wrong, dumb things stuck in my head from time to time, and then I repeat them until someone says something, and then I feel like the biggest dolt. If that was the only experience someone had with me, they might think I had no clue. It even used to happen to me when I was at work. Until I don't do it, I won't fault anyone else.

 

.

 

:iagree: I was about to post something similar. I could definitely have had a brain blip that lasted through a sermon. I would have been really horrified afterward! A brain blip doesn't mean that I don't know something--but my brain shortcircuits. I could simultaneously be knowing that the punishment of 40 years was for the incident with Joshua, Caleb, and the 10, but still including the 10 in the "Can you believe this?" part. Sad, but true! Especially since the "40 years" is a refrain recurring repeatedly in both Old and New Testament with regard to the unbelief of the Israelites, I can see my brain switching tracks somehow.

 

Since you were a visitor, I think you were right not to say anything and at this point, it sounds like the best course of action is to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Garga]

Do you think he meant that they persisted in their unbelief even after all the miracles in Egypt? But that he kept saying "After the 40 years" by accident, and meant "After the miracles in Egypt?"

 

 

If I were brave, I'd ask him if he had a slip of the tongue and meant after the miracles in Egypt instead of the 40 years.

[Carol in Cal.]

That would have bothered me a lot.

 

If it was a first visit to a new church, I would have taken it very seriously, and probably hoped to find a different one.

 

If this was my home church, and it happened once after 5 years, maybe not so bad, but I would have gently approached the pastor about it, and I would expect him to be grateful rather than defensive.

 

The error was pretty basic stuff, not very obscure. I knew that Bible story in 3rd grade.

[FO4UR]

Do you think he meant that they persisted in their unbelief even after all the miracles in Egypt? But that he kept saying "After the 40 years" by accident, and meant "After the miracles in Egypt?"

 

 

If I were brave, I'd ask him if he had a slip of the tongue and meant after the miracles in Egypt instead of the 40 years.

 

:iagree:I bet his wife has mentioned it to him already and he's feeling very humble. I've seen it happen to some good preachers...they know what they mean, I know what they mean....they just didn't *say* what they mean. Given that it's pretty basic knowledge...I'd assume he knew, but misspoke.

 

Now, if it were an incorrect interpretation of scripture, I'd be thinking it was a serious issue.

[Gooblink]

I sat through a 45 minute lecture where the teacher misspoke and called Yahweh, "Yahoo." She knew better and was horrified when it was brought to her attention. (I'll confess, I still giggle when I think about it!)

 

The mix-up would drive me nuts, sitting through an entire sermon, but more important to me for future attendance would be his attitude toward correction.

 

:)

[NancyNellen]

This would absolutely positively bother me. No pastor should be that clueless of Bible chronology. Yikes.

[lionfamily1999]

I sat through a 45 minute lecture where the teacher misspoke and called Yahweh, "Yahoo." She knew better and was horrified when it was brought to her attention. (I'll confess, I still giggle when I think about it!)

 

The mix-up would drive me nuts, sitting through an entire sermon, but more important to me for future attendance would be his attitude toward correction.

 

:)

You know what's really interesting? There are those that believe that Yahoo is the correct way to pronounce it. I read that about a year ago, looking into YHWH. It has something to do with vowels, I don't think they were used in Hebrew? Something like that. Anyway, just thought I'd share useless bit of knowledge 12,498.

[Gooblink]

You know what's really interesting? There are those that believe that Yahoo is the correct way to pronounce it. I read that about a year ago, looking into YHWH. It has something to do with vowels, I don't think they were used in Hebrew? Something like that. Anyway, just thought I'd share useless bit of knowledge 12,498.

 

Wow! I'd never heard that. I think I'll stick with Yahweh, as long as there are no Ancients around to correct me. :tongue_smilie:

[mytwomonkeys]

YAHOO. that made me laugh outloud!:lol:

[Parrothead]

I'd like to say it wouldn't bother me, but I know myself better. I know because while is wasn't a priest, something similar happened. I got outside far enough for the door to close, turned to dh and said, "What was she thinking?"

[6packofun]

Oh! I see...thank you for clarifying; I had to go back and reread the OP!

[mazakaal]

Thanks for all the responses. Unfortunately it's too late to say something about it now. I'm sure my path will cross his again (dh knows him; their ministries overlap a bit), so I will try to give him the benefit of the doubt and hope that he had a repeated brain blip. But I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one that would have been bothered by this.

[lionfamily1999]

Wow! I'd never heard that. I think I'll stick with Yahweh, as long as there are no Ancients around to correct me. :tongue_smilie:

:iagree:

YAHOO. that made me laugh outloud!:lol:

;)